Sports Photographers and Aperture

I was wondering if there are any sports photographers out there that use strictly use Aperture for their post processing. I am considering a Photo Mechanic/ Photoshop workflow perhaps in addition to Aperture. Anyone have any thoughts or pros and cons in reference to modifying my process?
Thanks in advance!

I shoot predominantly sports and use a PhotoMechanic/Aperture workflow from location on a macbook pro or at home with a Mac Pro. A typical workflow:
1. Ingest with PM (I tend to shoot JPG unless big time event or uncertain light)
2. Select pics to file with tagging and create new temp directory for just the keepers
3. Caption and rename the keepers
4. Upload the temp keeper directory into Aperture and make minor adjustments as necessary (typically horizon line and cropping)
5. Save the files into a temp upload directory at a compression setting to get size down to 2MB or less (usually PS 8)
6. FTP the upload directory to the wire service site
Given that I do very limited editing, I find Aperture the most efficient tool. It also then creates an auto-archive of the keepers. At a later time, I may review the rest of the ingest pics for anything I may want to keep for stock. If editing on a Macbook Pro, I'll export the project to a portable hard drive and later upload it to my master Aperture Library on the Mac Pro at home (which, in turn, has on online vault and off-line vault) and burn the project backups periodically to DVD. No chance for lost images with several redundancies.
I'd be curious to hear other experiences / workflow tweaks.
www.backstopimages.com

Similar Messages

  • I wonder how pro photographers use aperture?I shoot raw and my harddrive is alreay full.I'm not able to import new pictures.Is it ok if i create a vault and delete all my projects in the HD.Can I use an external HD use aperture through the vault??

    I wonder how pro photographers use aperture?I shoot raw and my harddrive is alreay full.I'm not able to import new pictures. I don't know what to do. I created a vault. My plan was to create a vault(put all my master files into an external harddrive) and then delete all my projects in my mac pro's harddrive. Is it the correct way to do it ? What should I do if I have thousands of raw files ? How should my workflow be? Can I use an external HD and use aperture through the vault,without keeping the master files on my computer's hard drive?? Or should I shoot raw+jpeg and store raw files in an external backup harddrive and import only jpegs into my aperture library?

    There's a bit to learn.  It will slowly make sense.
    Aperture is an empty field.  You're given a tractor and a whole bunch of attachments. What you grow, how, and where, is entirely up to you.
    Vaults are for back-up and only for back-up.  They have nothing to do with storing your working files.
    When your Library outgrows your system drive (and for good performance, you should leave c. 20% of every drive empty), it's time to convert some of your image's Masters from Managed to Referenced.  ("Managed" and "Referenced" refer to Masters, not to Libraries.)
    There are hundreds of posts in the forum, and several pages in the User Manual on using Masters.
    Many people run Aperture with the Library on their system disk, and most (or all) of their images' Masters on external FW drives.  This is a good set-up.  Note that you will likely have to take steps to back-up the data on your external drives.
    If you do the above, there should be no reason to delete any Projects.
    The choice of RAW or RAW+JPEG or JPEG depends on the kind of work you are doing.  I capture RAW only -- but I don't do any commercial shoots.  Pros on deadlines report that the RAW+JPEG works well for them.  Capture JPEG if it saves you time.  IMHO, there is not a good reason to shoot JPEG to save space (space is cheap; time expensive).
    Short-term solution: buy and use a FW800 external 1 TB drive, formatted "Mac OS Extended (Journaled)", and using Aperture relocate the Masters of all images older than 30 days to that drive.  (Be sure to change your back-up strategy to include this new drive; you may need a second new drive.)
    This general post of mine might help you understand more about Aperture.

  • Capabilities of Photos App and Aperture

    I see a lot of discussion about the new Photos app as being a replacement for Aperture, but most of these discussions seem to ignore many of the key capabilities which make Aperture important to many professionals. And the idea that many of these have been removed but will reappear sometime in the future is ridiculous--nobody could run a business using a tool like that. Are you supposed to go out of business until the time in the future when Apple reintroduces the feature you depended on?
    I'm also a little skeptical about how "modern" the app is and what a "streamlined interface" it has if it lacks many key features that already existed in the present software and which professional photographers and heavy Aperture users counted on. It's easy to "streamline" an interface if you just remove functionality. What many of the "reviewers" do not seem to understand is that it could take a year of more of heavy work to reconstruct an existing Aperture library with all that it contains because it is not just a hierarchical collection of pictures with keywords.
    If you've been looking at Photos, maybe you can fill in some of the gaps in knowledge of features.
    --Will Photos retain the edits of Photos in an Aperture library? Pros may have tens of thousands of photos (or more) with edits done over the past 8 years. Suggesting all of these need to be redone is kind of ridiculous. And why would any photographer ever trust an Apple product again if a corporate move resulted in that!
    --If some "tools" are missing, then all of them might as well be missing as far as importing an Aperture library since you wouldn't really know which of your tens of thousands of pictures which had been edited were affected. You couldn't trust the "versions" in your library as some would be missing some of the edits. Is there a list of which "tools" are missing? Almost all of them are pretty heavily used by large numbers of people.
    --I hear that the "Curves" tool is missing. What? This is one of the most heavily used tools of all, and one that was added to Aperture because of popular demand. What happens to all the edits done with the Curves tool? Do they disappear, making the library of edits useless? What possible reason would there be for removing something that important?
    --Does Photos feature a Web journal which allows collections of photos to be output as Web pages to be shared with clients or others?
    --Can I exports groups of files in any size and format (RAW, jpeg, TIFF, PNG., etc.)? You have to be able to do this for the product to be of any use to a professional at all.
    --Can I take advantage of multiple monitors to do things like show sets of photos and controls on one monitor and a full-screen image on the other?
    --I've hear the flags feature is gone. Why? What happens to all the images I've flagged through the years for one reason or another? Are pros supposed to go through 100,000 images they have stored in their library and flag them all again?
    --I've heard that "Stacks" is missing. For professional sports photographers, that is essential. You take bursts of images, you want them stacked on import so it's easy to pick the best from a burst and quickly get rid of the best. Why on earth would this be removed? It was one of the key selling points in early Aperture marketing and a heavily used feature.
    --Does the new app show the focus points, hot and cold areas, etc. on the pictures if so desired?
    --What happens to books, smart albums, Web journals, projects, folder, albums, etc. One heck of a lot of time has gone in to creating all of these.
    --Can I search using any metadata, keyword, etc.?
    --Can I customize my display to see the metadata I want in a particular situation. I certainly don't want to see all of it, but there are key fields which may be especially important.
    --How long would it take to "import" an Aperture library of, say, 500 gigabytes, into Photos? Would this would require another storage medium to store the new library as well as the old? I'm a little wary here, as the Aperture to Aperture 3 upgrade took 24 hours or more for many people.
    --Is iCloud storage of photos really practical for professionals who may have libraries of a terabyte or more? How exactly would all of this information migrate into the cloud? Who's got the bandwith for that?
    Anyone who could do a proper comparison of Aperture and Photos, from the perspective of a sophisticated Aperture, and not just gush about how it's an improvement on iPhoto, would be much appreciated. I haven't been able to figure much out from what I've seen so far.

    The app is in beta and we're not allowed comment. That's standard policy. What you can glean from reading around the web is the same that we can. My read on what I've seen: It's a step-up for iPhoto uses but for Pro users it's time to look elsewhere. It's not a robust Pro tool.

  • IPhoto events and Aperture projects

    What happens to iPhoto events and Aperture projects in Photos? I have read that Events and Projects are not available in the new Photos app. My library is entirely organised this way. If Photos is organised just by date, then will all my years of sorting be lost?

    If, like me, you used Events as your main organizational tool - you will really be disappointed in Photos.   My Albums transferred, but I had over 100,000 pictures, taken over 13 years and organized mostly by the "Event/Title" line above each group of pictures.   Those titles did not transfer to Photos.
    They do have an Album titled iPhoto Events and a lot of events are in there - however, not all and they are in a completely random order.   In my case, over 3,000 events with absolutely no way to find anything other than scroll through or possibly search.  Also, at this time there is no way to move forward with Event organization as it does not exist.   There is not way in Photos to label each days photos with an event or title.   It's like one big huge shoebox with date order the only organization.  Ridiculous.
    I mostly use a 35mm SLR Camera without any GPS designation - so I now have 109,000 photos in one big list organized by nothing but the date taken or scanned. 
    I have also scanned a lot of family history photos and old family photos - fortunately I put most of those in Albums - otherwise Photos is very excited to just list them according to the date I scanned them which has nothing to do with the content of the photo.
    Definitely back up your iPhoto before you do anything.   I am looking for an outside program that will continue my organization and not throw everything out on the whim of people who just use photos for social media and sharing.   This change made me realize that Apple has no intention of creating and keeping a serious organization system for amateur and professional photographers who have a large number of files that need to be organized and kept for many years.

  • Colorchecker Passport and Aperture 3

    Hi everyone,
    So, I was at the DFW Photo Expo today and attended some free seminars. One was on DSLR video (very good class) and one on color management. In the color management class, the class pretty much evolved around X-Brite Colorchecker Passport and Lightroom. I thought that it was very interesting, especially adjusting your RAW files to a certain standard.
    As I have found out, the automated features only work in Lightroom and I think that the instructor said Photoshop (neither of which I have). It appears that Aperture is left out of the running if you want to use the features that Colorchecker Passport has.
    As I haven't bought Aperture 3 yet, but I plan to, is there a need for something like this in Aperture to adjust for your camera (I have a Canon 60D) or is there an alternative? I know that there is a divid between Mac photographers between Aperture and Lightroom, so I don't want this thread to go down this path. I am concerned as to the best way to capture the true colors from what the camera saw and my eye saw. Also, there is the issue about color correcting your monitor and the importance (or not) of doing that. I have a fairly new 27" iMac that seems to look great to me. And of course the printer too.
    I know this is a multi-question post, but I'm hoping that some of you out there in Appleland can point me in the right direction.
    Thanks, Mark

    chacro wrote:
    I currently brush color adjustments to try and even things out. It works, but one day I hope to see brushable white balance.
    You and me both  .
    In the meantime, take a look at the Tint controls, both in the Enhance Brick and as a Quick Brush.  The advantage of the Enhance controls are that you can apply the color shift separately to each of the three major divisions of the luminance gamut (first things to try are warming your darks and cooling your mid-tones, and vice versa).  The advantage of the Tint Brush is in it's use for one-area or one-object hue shifts.
    Here's the Enhance Brick showing some Tint values applied:
    And here's a (quick & dirty -- ignore it as a photo) example of the Tint Brush at work -- the sky as recorded is entirely pale cyan.
    For architectural photographs each of these can put to effective use, and (imho) provide their own functionality a little quicker than the Color Brick tools (which, of course, I also use regularly).

  • New Macbooks and Aperture

    I'm aware the subject of the suitability of Macbooks for running Aperture has been discussed before in this forum but I haven't come across any detailed descriptions of how well Aperture actually runs on them.
    I currently have a 2 Ghz G5 with 3.5 Gb of ram and a 9600XT ATI video card and I find Aperture is usable but movement of the adjustment sliders for brightness, sharpness etc can be jerky and the spinning beach ball all too often makes an appearance.
    So I'd be grateful if someone with experience of using Aperture on a reasonably recent Macbook can let me know if the adjustments work smoothly and quickly without the problems I've been experiencing with the G5. I'm not looking to replace the G5 with a Macbook but rather I'm after a portable Mac I can use out in the field and also at digital photography workshops that I participate in. In regard to the latter, I've been asked by the Photographic Society of Queensland (PSQ), Australia to give a couple of workshops and a presentation about photo imaging on the Mac and one of the programmes I'll be demonstrating is Aperture. This is something of a breakthrough for Mac users who belong to the PSQ as in the past we've been looked upon as something of an oddity by the PC users who are in the overwhelming majority. However, PSQ is aware of how the Mac is becoming more popular and so has given me the opportunity to demonstrate it and software, like Aperture, that is exclusive to it. Consequently, I want to make a good impression and hopfully the latest Macbooks are capable of doing that.
    Cheers, John
    Dual 2Ghz G5, Powerbook 1.25 Ghz   Mac OS X (10.4.9)  
    Dual 2Ghz G5   Mac OS X (10.4.3)  

    I'm using Aperture with a black Macbook (core2duo), purchased about 3 months ago. After comparing Lightroom and Aperture, I actually purchased Lightroom because it performed SO much better on the Macbook. However, I'm a "hard core" apple user for more than 2 decades, and there are things about Aperture that simply brought me back, so I'm giving it another chance.
    It is NOT a smooth experience on the Macbook. As has been well documented, performance lags. HOWEVER, it does work-- just requires a bit more patience. I think I am probably going to end up staying with Aperture, hoping that v2.0 helps performance some (yes, I know it may not since the graphics card (or lack thereof) is limiting factor. Maybe I'll upgrade to a MacbookPro in a year, but I really want the smaller (13") mac for portability (most of the time, I use my Macbook hooked up to a 20" cinema display at home).
    It's really a personal choice. What I'd say is you really need to see how it works *for you* on a Macbook. I'd imagine that for most "professional" photographers (I'm not), or those who are doing lots of work with Aperture, the Macbook could get frustrating. But the interface is so.... apple. Hope that helps!
    Black Macbook- 2gb RAM   Mac OS X (10.4.9)  

  • Sky Sports 1 and 2 and BT in general - Absolutely ...

    I would like to start by stating this will be a bit of an essay but I hope anyone who opens this thread up takes the time and consideration to read and takes it on-board, I am particurlarly aiming that at prospective BT customers who may be here to consider taking up a contract with BT, I strongly urge you to NOT DO THIS and to use my experience as the leading reason why.
    We have been BT customers since we moved into our current property back in 2003, we have the current full package on offer, BT Infinity, with the Sky Sports and ESPN upgrades and the full On Demand and Broadband services. We have experienced numerous problems over the past three to four years with connectivity issues. The broadband drops in and out all the time, it's hard to put a level of consistency on this but on some days it can drop out 25-30 times, it can happen a lot at the weekend some weeks or weekdays on the others or both, the timing varies, it doesn't appear to be reflective of particurlar weather conditions, not that this should really matter anyway but we've been investigating all possible lines of enquiry as to why the problems keep happening, by my calculation we've had 18 engineers out to visit the property, I myself, and this does not include the other numerous phone calls made by fellow family members, have called and reported the problem to BT at least 50 times in this time period, I've taken days off work to wait for engineers, I've unplugged and reset my hub more times than I care to remember, we've had the hub itself replaced four times, the Vision box replaced twice, the lines re-routed through our house twice and more e-mails and letters than I reckon President Barack Obama sends in one year in office!
    And so far, to date, and I am talking about in the last five days, the problem still exists! The only way to get the connection back is to turn the hub off and back on again, or use the reset button, which we all know disrupts the hub and often results in further faults down the line, I would love to not have to do this but given we're paying for 24/7 internet access I should not have to sit around waiting, in most cases, up to 3-4 hours for the signal to return to the hub by itself (I know, I've timed it, something else I've wated much of my own time doing). The lights don't flash or change colour on the hub either when this problem occurs (the hub should register lack of connection, with the lights going from blue to either flashing blue or, in most cases, red, just for the record they stay blue but we have used various devices in this house ranging from state-of-the-art, brand-new laptops to tablets to i-phones to desktops and the problem occurs the same for everyone so before I get one of the many excuses I've already had from BT that it's a potential "device problem" you can forget that one, been there, done that!).
    I have urged, and urged, and urged the engineers, the people I speak to one the phone, the personal advisors our case has been passed on too, to look at potential problems outside our property i.e. the exchange. This has been rebuffed time and time again. "It's not the problem sir, the problem is here sir, the problem is not our fault sir" etc. etc. etc. Well, guess what....
    We've just received a phone call informing us that, from June 10th in our area, due to issues with the exchange being able to hold the signal, Sky Sports 1 and Sky Sports 2 will no longer be avaliable on our BT package. As huge cricket fans, from a personal perspective, first off, this is infuriating. The person we spoke too also claimed Sky have "pulled the plug" on the package so, also, I'm a little confused as too which is the actual issue here resulting in the loss of Sky Sports? That you've known all along that there has been problem in my local area with the exchange and the signal it can hold, or that Sky have pulled the rights to their sports package? Or perhaps that you spent £757 million recently on a new TV rights package for Premiership football for two new BT Sports channels (those ones you see currently advertised, on, of all channels, Sky Sports 1 and 2!) and actually are just quite happy to cut customers out who have lined your pockets with substantial monthly fees for programming you knew full well didn't work when you first signed contracts with Sky to pick it up, and then distributed to customers? Are you seriously telling me after, by my calculation, three years, you didn't know Sky Sports 1 and 2 didn't work in my local area, yet carried on debiting bank accounts, advertising the channels, supplying them and then, now, with less than a month's notice, you've pulled the plug? That takes me right back to the title of my message - absolutely disgraceful.
    I should make it clear at this point we have experienced problems with BT Vision too, albeit not lately, thank God, although that is not to say the problems wouldn't return. Signal dropping in and out, screen crackling and dropping out, black screens frequently on SS1, SS2 and ESPN etc. As for the On Demand service, that is obviously effected by the hub signal dropping in and out, the Vision box also does not appear to correlate with the hub when the signal returns and remains offline for a further amount of time, even when it is disconnected and then reconnected. It is constantly buffering too when the signal is low. Also, one other, far more minor point, you've been advertising 'red button coming soon' now for about three months!? I don't know what your definition of 'coming soon' is, but it's not the same as mine I can assure you, and I'm willing to bet quite a few others too!
    Can you give me a good reason why I shouldn't report you too Trading Standards for misleading and false advertising? For 3 years you've been selling us a Sky Sports package you know full well won't work properly in our local area, I don't blame you for Sky's monpoly on sport, but perhaps you can explain to me why you've given two answers that completely contradict each other to the future dealings with Sky Sports in our local area? Why have you not addressed the issues with the exchange for our connectivity problems, despite the fact your now claiming it is what is probably attributed to causing our issues with the two sports channels? Also, I have worked in customer service jobs and I know people wind the heck out of you on some days, but a significant portion of your "customer advisors" are rude and ignorant. You ring the freephone number, your on hold for half-a-century, you get put through to the call-centre in Bombay and you are treated with contempt, I actually feel sorry for the people who work out there, they are clearly reading from a script and lack in clear English Language skills, which is not their fault, it's yours. As for anyone who takes dispute with that, go and ask them a question next time like "how is your day?" They won't answer, they can't, it's not on their call sheet. The few I have dealt with who have clear use of the language are, as I said, rude and ignorant, often accusing me, quite clearly, of lying and of having not reported the problem, for me then to find out a later date when I speak to the technical deparment and to BT Openreach (and yes, I know they are two seperate companies) that date is not transferred correctly between the two which is why whoever you speak too in the call-centre usually only has a last referral point for you from some years ago, it's also quite clearly a deflection manouvre to keep you away from actually getting your problem resolved, paying Openreach to dispatch engineers if required and so you don't clog up the minimal amount of contactable phone numbers for the average customer that are based in the UK.
    Failure to receive a suitable and acceptable answer to my queries will result in me having no other option but to consider taking the matter further, I am also inclined now to make it my work between now and the date of June 10th to persuade everyone I know and they know to stay as far away from your company as possible and the "services" you claim to provide.
    Also, as huge cricket, and for that matter, NFL fans, maybe you should consider that many sports-viewers in this country aren't just about football. Yes I know that's where the money lies but there is profit to be made from other sports ventures too, I don't think you realize just how many fans you are leaving out in the cold over this move, the whole reason we, and we are just one example, subscribed to the Sky Sports package was for the cricket, and for the NFL. Two sports that are entirely monopolized by Sky, yes I realize, as I state earlier, that's not your fault, but why don't you show a bit of interest in them then? Why don't you be slightly different, you have over £700 million to spend on Premiership football but little else? If you want to attract more customers and build larger profit margins, you have to be more diverse and explore new options and directions to do this.
    I'm sure some will say, "why not get Sky?" Well unfortunately we can't due to our location but at least Sky were up-front and honest enough to tell us this when they first came to do a consultation, one, that by the way, we had as a secondary option to BT due to the attractions of the On Demand package, that then wasn't offered by Sky. How sad it's come too this and what an awful way to treat loyal customers who have upgraded to the packages you have offered in all innocence to obtain a better and more fruitful service? Customers who have never been late with payments either and used the likes of the Box office service for both movies and music (when the latter was chargable) as well, the money you have had off us, and that is what we've received in return and yet, perhaps, the poorest reflection on us, is we have stuck it for so long, but we are at the end of our tethers now and utterly furious at the decisions we've learned today that I am going to ensure we get to the bottom of this.
    Thank you for taking the time to read, what I appreciate, is a lengthy message. I didn't want to have to write this but it was the only way of making our problems and feelings clear, and I wanted to include everything so as not too mislead anyone myself.

    Sadly as this is customer to customer forum you are only talking to fellow customers.
    Perhaps it would be better to contact the Mods who are the only BT employees here,
    Life | 1967 Plus Radio | 1000 Classical Hits | Kafka's World
    Someone Solved Your Question?
    Please let other members know by clicking on ’Mark as Accepted Solution’
    Helpful Post?
    If a post has been helpful, say thanks by clicking the ratings star.

  • Print quality difference between iphoto and aperture...?

    when ordering books, is there a print quality difference between using iPhoto and Aperture? or are they sent to the same lab?
    it's possible i may have some setting wrong, but when i order a book using iphoto, i never really feel the quality is that great. it's good, i just feel it could be a lot better. the print quality sort of reminds me of newsprint, albeit high quality newsprint. similar sized prints made at home on my basic 3-in-1 printer look better.
    thanks...

    Previews are what you view on your display. When you import a photo into Aperture (and I'm pretty sure iPhoto as well), your computer automatically generates a preview for quick viewing. The original images are stored in your library, but it is the preview that you see.
    In Aperture, you are able to set the size and quality of these previews. When sharing photos between Aperture and iPhoto, the process is as follows:
    Let's say that your images are stored in Aperture, but you also want to be able to view them in iPhoto without taking up too much room on your hard drive. Essentially, if you were to import the originals into iPhoto as well, you would be storing two exact, yet separate copies of the same image on your hard drive. As you are aware, with large images (whether JPEG's, and especially RAW) this would put quite a tax on your storage capacity after not too long.
    So, you have your images in one or the other (in this case Aperture), but you want to play around with them in iPhoto. What you can do, is open iPhoto, go to the File menu and then select, Show Aperture Library. This will open a window with all of the contents of your Aperture Library. You can then drag any images you want into iPhoto . The only thing is, you are not dragging the original JPEG's, but rather, the previews of those images. If you have those previews set to a lower quality (again for capacity concerns), you will only have lower quality and lower detailed images in iPhoto. These images might not be ideal, or even suitable for printing high quality prints. The previews that you generate in Aperture though can be adjusted to be extremely high quality with no size limits.
    My thinking was that since you mentioned Aperture, it sounded like you had experience with working with it and with ordering a photo book through Aperture. I guess you were saying that you ordered via iPhoto, weren't happy with the quality and were wondering if Aperture created books were better.
    Anyway, if this is the case, I cannot answer that for you. I have never ordered a book through Aperture. If the quality of your images is good, you should be able to get a decent product no matter where you order it from. There is not doubt that the materials used and the print shop that does the work makes a difference, but if your images are good, you should still get a decent product through iPhoto. Perhaps iPhoto isn't the way to go though if you have had poor experiences with them.
    If you haven't used Aperture yet, I would highly recommend it though aside from the photo book aspect of this thread. It is a stellar product.
    I hope this helps.
    Message was edited by: macorin

  • I recently upgraded to Yosemite 10.10.2 and Aperture 2.1.4 will no longer open.  I cannot access my photos and I don't want to pay for latest version of Aperture since this application is no longer going to be supported.  How can I get my pictures?

    I recently upgraded to Yosemite 10.10.2 and Aperture 2.1.4 will no longer open.  I cannot access my photos and I don't want to pay for latest version of Aperture since this application is no longer going to be supported.  How can I get my pictures?

    If you want just the originals, then you can go into the Aperture library (right click on it and do "show package contents"). Inside is a directory called "Masters" and you can find the original files in a bunch of subfolders.
    But... you'll lose all adjustments, keywords, and other information, and just have the files as they were imported originally from the cameras.
    Easiest is probably to buy Aperture and update everything, and then migrate to the Photos application down the road if that's what you want. Aperture 3.0 came out in 2010 (five years ago!) so it's not like you've upgraded in a while

  • After upgrading to Yosemite and Aperture 3.6 all the library icons are shown plain. Does anyone has a hint?

    After upgrading to Yosemite and Aperture 3.6 all the library icons are shown plain. Does anyone has a hint?

    If it is still slow after removing Symantec, you may need a RAM upgrade. Yosemite can run very poorly on older machines with only 4 GB RAM.

  • IPhone - how to sync with iPhoto and Aperture at the same time ???

    I'm having a really hard time with syncing my photos - I'm using iPhoto and Aperture on my Mac. When I launch iTunes and start managing my iPhone, it seems like I should be able to sync photos from a variety of sources all at once (iPhoto, Aperture, other folders).
    However, whichever option I select in the photos drop-down becomes the only libraries that are available to sync. What I mean is that if I select some of the Albums in my iPhoto list and sync those, when I later drill down to Aperture and select albums from there and perform a sync - then the previously synced/loaded albums and photos from iPhoto are automatically removed from the iPhone.
    Why can't I sync between multiple photo albums / sources at the same time? This is incredibly annoying.

    Here's how I solved this problem:
    In Aperture, select File -> Import -> iPhoto Library
    Then under the "Store Files" dropdown, be sure "In their Original Location" is select. This will allow Aperture to see your iPhoto library, but it will be managed by reference rather than phyisically imported.
    Now, in iTunes, select Aperture as the application from which you want to synch photos, and select the option to synch specific albums.
    You should be able to see the names of albums in iPhoto as well as those created in Aperture.

  • How to remove duplicates in iphoto 7.1.5 and aperture 2.1.4 on same hard drive

    How to remove duplicates from iPhoto 7.1.5 and Aperture 2.1.4 on same hard drive?

    For iPhoto duplicate annihalitor is a good solution
    For Aperture it is best to ask in the aperture forum
    LN

  • What's the best way to merge, restore or reconstruct iPhoto and Aperture libraries to resolve images that are not found/offline?

    Hey there, Apple Support Communities.
    To start, I'm working on a MBP Retina 15" with a 2.3GHz i7 processor and 16 GB of RAM.  10GB free on a 256GB SS HD.  Attached are two external HDs - one 1TB Western Digital portable drive from 2011, one 2TB Porsche LaCie non-portable drive from 2013; both connected via USB.  All photo libraries in question are on the external drives.
    I have Aperture 3.5.1 and iPhoto 9.5.1.  I prefer to work in Aperture.
    The Issue(s)
    Over the years, I have accumulated a number of iPhoto libraries and Aperture libraries.  At one point, I thought my WD drive was dying so I purchased the LaCie and copied all libraries over the the LaCie drive.  (Turns out, there's probably an issue with my USB port reading drives, because I can once again see the WD drive and occasionally I can't see the LaCie drive.)
    So now I have old version of some libraries on the WD drive, and new versions on the LaCie drive.
    When I was moving things, I ran the software Gemini to de-dupe my iPhoto libraries.  Not sure what effect that may have had on my issues.
    In my main Aperture library and in some iPhoto libraries, I get the image-not-found badge or exclamation point.  I've dug through the hidden Masters folders in various libraries to find the original image.  In some cases, I have been able to find the original image, sometimes in a different version of the iPhoto library.
    My Question(s)
    1.  For Aperture libraries that have missing originals, is there some magical way to find them, or have they just disappeared into the oblivion?
    2.  For iPhoto libraries that have missing originals and I have found the original in another iPhoto library, what is the best way to proceed?
    3.  Are there quirks to merging iPhoto and Aperture libraries (by using the Import->Library) feature that I should be aware of?
    TL;DR: Too many iPhoto and Aperture libraries, and not all the original pictures can be found by the libraries anymore, though some originals still do exist in other libraries.  Steps/process to fix?
    Thank you!  Let me know if you need add'l info to offer advice.
    With appreciation,
    Christie

    That will not be an easy task, Christie.
    I am afraid, your cleaning session with Gemini may have actually removed originals. I have never used this duplicate finder tool, but other posters here reported problems. Gemini seems to replace duplicate original files in photo libraries by links, and this way, deleting images can cause the references for other images to break. And Aperture does not follow symbolic links - at least, I could never get it to find original files this way, when I experimented with this.
    1.  For Aperture libraries that have missing originals, is there some magical way to find them, or have they just disappeared into the oblivion?
    You have to find the originals yourself. If you can find them or restore them from a backup, Aperture can reconnect them. The reconnect panel can show you, where the originals are supposed to be, so youcan see the filename and make a Spotlight search.
    For iPhoto libraries that have missing originals and I have found the original in another iPhoto library, what is the best way to proceed?
    Make a copy of the missing original you found in a folder outside the iPhoto library. You can either open the iPhoto library in Aperture and use "File > Locate Referenced file" to reconnect the originals, or simply reimport them. Then Lift&Stamp all adjustments and metadata to the reimported version.
    See this manual page on how to reconnect originals:  Aperture 3 User Manual: Working with Referenced Images  (the paragraph:  Reconnecting Missing or Offline Referenced Images)
    Are there quirks to merging iPhoto and Aperture libraries (by using the Import->Library) feature that I should be aware of?
    References images will stay referenced, managed will remain managed. You need to unhide all hidden photos in iPhoto - this cannot be done in Aperture.
    and not all the original pictures can be found by the libraries anymore, though some originals still do exist in other libraries.  Steps/process to fix?
    That is probably due to Gemini's replacing duplicate originals by links, and your best cause of action is to fix this before merging the libraries. Reconnecting can be done for your iPhoto libraries in Aperture.

  • External disk for Time Machine and Aperture Vaults

    I'm planning on buying an external HD for backups with Time Machine and I will also be using it for Vaults in Aperture.
    Should I partition the disk into two volumes, one for each, or will TM and Aperture co-exist quite happily on the same volume?
    I'd rather use a single volume as, in my experience, partitioning a disk always results in one volume filling up long before the other, however integrity of the backups is the most important requirement.

    I strongly agree with V.K.
    The other big reason to partition is, as you say, one volume will fill up before the other.
    That's exactly how TM is designed to work -- fill up whatever space you allocate to it. Unlike traditional archive-type backup systems, it manages it's space and deletes backups automatically. As you probably know, it keeps it's hourly backups for 24 hours, then deletes them, except the first of the day, which becomes a daily backup and is kept for a month. Similarly, after a month, one of those daily backups becomes a weekly, and the others are deleted. But the weeklies are kept as long as there's room. Unless something goes wrong, you never have to do a thing.
    So, if you have other data in that same partition, TM will, eventually, fill up the remaining space, limiting the space available to Aperture.

  • HT201070 I currently use OS 10.6.8 and Aperture 3, and just got a Nikon D600. It seems the the RAW Compatibility updates (4.01) are for use only with OS 10.7.5 or later, is that right? Do I need to update my whole OS to use this camera? Thank you!

    I currently use OS 10.6.8 and Aperture 3, and just got a Nikon D600. It seems the the RAW Compatibility updates (4.01) are for use only with OS 10.7.5 or later, is that right? Do I need to update my whole OS to use this camera? Thank you!

    Thanks to Bobthefisherman & Turbostar.  Turns out I've got a corrupted disk (which I found out via "verify disk" on Disk Utility First Aid.  Previously, I never thought to verify disk -- only to repair permissions -- so I never knew my HD had been corrupted.
    Wasn't able to do a clean install of OSX10.6 because my SuperDrive only sporadically will load discs, so I am taking it to the Apple Store to see if they can do a clean install, and depending upon costs, get the Superdrive replaced. 
    The HD wasn't partioned by the way.  And I did have just over 40GB of contiguous space. 
    Thanks again.

Maybe you are looking for